felipec

10 ms·

1. 91.▲
   by felipec 15y ago

   I did not mention "history is sacred", Google did, in his analysis. And I didn't pick any example, as I clearly said; they are basically the same, the only real difference is in the way they deal with branches, and obviously, I concentr
2. 92.▲
   by felipec 15y ago

   No, there's no extension in mercurial that makes branches behave like git branches. That is clear in the 160 comments where I even created a challenge for anyone to try to do the same in mercurial, and curiously, people have criticized my v
3. 93.▲
   by felipec 15y ago

   Saying "the author failed" is easy. Presenting a case that demonstrates so is not. What I said is that they are basically the same, except for the handling of branches, not history rewriting as you suggest. I assume you agree that they ar
4. 94.▲
   by felipec 15y ago

   It's not a contradiction. Note the word why . If in the analysis it turns out I fail to show that git is indeed superior, I would have to agree mercurial is superior, or they are equal. That was not the case.